The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1887-09-15
ScrouIa
Hoods SarsapariIIa

the law. Section % reads: "The com
missioner of the general land Office, under
the direction of the governor, may with
hold from lease any agricultural lands
necessary for purposes of settlement, or,
In MS discretion, he may lease such agri-
cultural lands in small quantities for a
less period than five years, as the public
interest and development of the country
may seem to require: and, no agricultural
lands shall be leased if in the iudg-
ment of the commissioner they NAV be
In immediate demand for settlement.
but such lands shall be held
for settlement and sold to actual settlers
only, under the provisions of this act"
Standing this law up beside, the facts and
your admissions, 1 frankly say that 1 am
unable to see where the commissioner gets
the authority Tor the discretion, if he
should dare to exercise it, under such cir
cumstances), to lease out these lands in
unlimited quantities on terms to suit the
lessee, nor to exceed the laws maximum
of five years. Under date of August 2
you wrote letter to a citizen of this
county, in which these words occur: "All
unsold or Unbiased lands are subject to
lease. enclose you blanks to lease under
the new law. Apply for what you want"
Would 1t not be more In consonance with
the letter and spirit of the law to have
written him something after this manner?
apply for what you want, and accompany
your application with such evidence as
you have to the effect that the lands Won
apply for are not in immediate demand
for purposes of settlement. I will then
determine whether they are subject to
lease?"
l am aware of the severe penalty i'm
posed by section IL of the law upon those
who fence, use, occupy or appropriate.
by herdlng or line-riding," any of these
lands, and expect the governor to rigidly
enforce it. Most of the fences erected
around these lands were put there by
trespassers in open defiance of law
prohibiting it before the enactment of
the present law. The Legislature was fully
cognizant of this fact at the time this act
passed, which explains why this provision
occurs in section 20 of the laws: "All en-
closures of, or fences upon, any of the
public lands, or the lands belonging to
the public free school, asylum or Uni
versity funds, without lawful authority.
shall be removed within sixty DAYS from
ohAS oAiiiO uhAo uSO ohall UdhO ouCCU. Ii Gl6
commissioner refuses to lease any land
because of the demand for settlement, as
he should do, the trespasser should be
made to suffer the penalty in case he re-
fuses to remove his fence within the period
fixed by the law. There is no penalty for
merely permitting stock to Craze on these
lands, hence, there need be no ."ruthless
destruction of the cattle interests of
Texas by enforcing one part of wise
and just law" The legislature never in
tended to humble the dignity of the state
for the protection or a defiant trespasser
at the sacrifice of the settlement and de-
velopment of the richest portion of the
state. No such concessions were made
by the friends of the bill while it was
under consideration in the legislature. If,
indeed, such had been done, it never could
have passed in any shape.
1t the policy of leasing all lands ap-
piled TO, whether occupied or unoccu-
pied, agricultural or pasture lands, be
adopted in open violation of these plain
and explicit provisions, how are the peo-
pie to receive it? Perhaps the 100000
acres leased in thirty days, which you
allude to with SO much pride, may tend to
satisfy those who are unacquainted with
the true situation; but the man with the
plow and hoe, in the west, will return to
his lonely dugout and, with sad counte
nance, will count the broken pledges and
disregarded promises of the powers that
be, and wonder how long this state of
affairs is to continue.
Very respectfully,
j. N. BROWNING.